Class Action Lawsuit against Dish for Dropping Voom?

**scots** · 05-28-2008 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by davelip75

Shouldn't a person be mad if they just spent $2,000 on a tv and a 2 year commitment to a cable company only to have their HD content drastically change?

Nobody forced you to spend $2,000 on a TV, and nobody forced you to agree to a 2 year commitment. A 2 year commitment was offered in exchange for a discount, and you agreed. You didn't have to do it. You'll have absolutely no luck in court due to Dish's terms of service that you agreed to. Switch to DishHD Essential and save yourself $10/month. You'll get the $150 you spent on the upgrade back before your commitment is over if you do that.

**Geronimo** · 05-28-2008 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by DBS Commando

Voom will be most likely be dead within a month if they don't renew their contract with the few cable companies still carrying them.

Stop blaming Dish for Voom's failure

Near as I can tell there is only one other US provider carrying them----Cablevision. Does any other US carrier offer VOOM.

BTW they are on one of the Canadian systems and they are distributed abroad. Not sure that there is much revenue to those deals but they do exist.

**lern4483** · 05-28-2008 04:12 PM

Originally Posted by Geronimo

Near as I can tell there is only one other US provider carrying them----Cablevision. Does any other US carrier offer VOOM.

BTW they are on one of the Canadian systems and they are distributed abroad. Not sure that there is much revenue to those deals but they do exist.

Dish and voom need to end this asap. People are hurt by this. Subs invested money no matter how you look at it.

There are people who take great joy in seeing true HD programming disolved. I think in the end we all suffer.

Again, forget its voom if ''you'' had programming you enjoyed and your sat company just pulled it while you were sleeping you would be just as pissed off as we are.

True its just tv. However we spend our good money to make it as enjoyable as possible.

I, for one, am not ''over this''. To those who say its enough, Im sorry to say, ill be over it when I feel like it!

I wouldn't wish this on anyone..No matter what the programming or jump up and down.

**juan** · 05-28-2008 04:19 PM

Originally Posted by Geronimo

Near as I can tell there is only one other US provider carrying them----Cablevision. Does any other US carrier offer VOOM.

BTW they are on one of the Canadian systems and they are distributed abroad. Not sure that there is much revenue to those deals but they do exist.

And Cablevision jut moved the VOOM channels to Switched Video..now only a handful can see them

**clapple** · 05-28-2008 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Hemi 6.1

Who cares? Voom is dead! Its over. If you want to make another lawyer rich as hell ,Go right ahead. Enough with the Voom crap already. Its freaken TV.

Amen brother!

**Geronimo** · 05-28-2008 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by lern4483

Dish and voom need to end this asap. People are hurt by this. Subs invested money no matter how you look at it.

There are people who take great joy in seeing true HD programming disolved. I think in the end we all suffer.

Again, forget its voom if ''you'' had programming you enjoyed and your sat company just pulled it while you were sleeping you would be just as pissed off as we are.

True its just tv. However we spend our good money to make it as enjoyable as possible.

I, for one, am not ''over this''. To those who say its enough, Im sorry to say, ill be over it when I feel like it!

I wouldn't wish this on anyone..No matter what the programming or jump up and down.

I understand that you are upset. As I have mentioned a number of times I watched VOOM as well. All I have said in this thread is that I don't see much likelihood of success for a class action suit against DISH because of the terms in the residential agreement.

the fact that you and I both wish that it had not happened does not alter that. I was upset when DISH had a dispute with my local ABC affiliate, I was uset that it took them so long to come to terms with my local RSN, and I was uspet that I can no longer sub to MLB EI.

but the fact that I am upset does not mean that i would prevail in a lawsuit.---which is what I thought this thread was about.

**Geronimo** · 05-28-2008 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by juan

And Cablevision jut moved the VOOM channels to Switched Video..now only a handful can see them

Not that it matters but hat is "Switched video?"

**FitzAusTex** · 05-28-2008 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by juan

And Cablevision jut moved the VOOM channels to Switched Video..now only a handful can see them

Only those with Cable Cards can not see switched video. Cable Card take rates are generally very low. Cablevision is offering one set top box free for 12 months to those impacted by channels going to SDV, IIRC.

**FitzAusTex** · 05-28-2008 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by Geronimo

Not that it matters but hat is "Switched video?"

Sending the less in-demand channels only when someone tunes to it. Frees up/lets them juggle bandwidth better.

**davelip75** · 05-28-2008 04:29 PM

People keep saying I only signed a 2 year contract for a special deal. There was no special deal. Having to pay $150 to upgrade my service and get an HDDVR is a special deal/discount? Do you guys work for Dish Network or something?

I have a legitimate argument/concern. If you are a Dish Network customer, how can you not have some anger/resentment towards the company if they switch their HD programming with NON HD, upconverted, stretched, commerical ridden content.

Either I'm insane or people would prefer to watch a movie like Casino on Bravo for 4 hours with 1 1/2 hours of commercials, vs. commercial free 720p/1080i HD films on Monsters HD/Rave/Kung Fu/Gallery.

My other argument is this: If you live in an apartment, and the landlord has a dispute with the water company and doesn't pay the bill, the tenant is left to suffer when the water gets turned off.

Dish network has a dispute with Voom, so they decide to terminate their contract. In the apartment situation, a tenant has the legal right to sue the landlord for loss of services. Why shouldn't that apply in this situation?